RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,936
Posts: 5,390,064
Members: 24,725
Currently online: 580
Newest member: Miltan08

TrekToday headlines

New Trek-themed Bobble Heads
By: T'Bonz on Aug 21

IDW Publishing November Trek Comic
By: T'Bonz on Aug 20

Pegg/Wright Trilogy In The Works
By: T'Bonz on Aug 20

Star Trek: The Compendium Rebate Details
By: T'Bonz on Aug 20

Gold Key Archives Volume 2
By: T'Bonz on Aug 19

Takei Documentary Wins Award
By: T'Bonz on Aug 19

Cumberbatch To Voice Khan
By: T'Bonz on Aug 19

Shaun And Ed On Phineas and Ferb
By: T'Bonz on Aug 18

New Ships Coming From Official Starships Collection
By: T'Bonz on Aug 18

Trek Stars Take On Ice Bucket Challenge
By: T'Bonz on Aug 18


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies XI+

Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here.

View Poll Results: Grade the movie...
A+ 144 19.38%
A 161 21.67%
A- 100 13.46%
B+ 82 11.04%
B 58 7.81%
B- 27 3.63%
C+ 40 5.38%
C 38 5.11%
C- 24 3.23%
D+ 11 1.48%
D 13 1.75%
D- 10 1.35%
F 35 4.71%
Voters: 743. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old June 14 2013, 12:26 AM   #4216
AnnLouise
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Location: Wisconsin
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

I think the movie has a lot of flaws and if they stop you from liking it then that's fine. However if other people can overlook the flaws and inconsistencies and blatant homeage then why aren't their opinions as valid as yours.
For me, a movie becomes "bad" when something in it takes me out of the movie experience. I starting thinking about the flaw, and not the movie. For me, the flaws in ST didn't take me out of the film, so I'm more forgiving of them.
__________________
(it is) in the denial of moral choices that we commit our worst offences.
Matthew Scully
AnnLouise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 14 2013, 12:52 AM   #4217
CaptainDonovin
Fleet Captain
 
CaptainDonovin's Avatar
 
Location: Labrador City. woof
View CaptainDonovin's Twitter Profile
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
Belz... wrote: View Post
How does one run like a dork, anyway ?
One can always find a good explanation for things from the Pythons.
__________________
Long live DS9!
CaptainDonovin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 14 2013, 03:32 AM   #4218
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

As far as plot-holes go...

When the Enterprise starts what I've seen called her improbable fall to Earth, couldn't she have actually been in the planet's orbital path? At roughly 67,000 miles per hour and factoring in the time it took for New Vulcan to be called, the Vengeance repaired, torpedoes to be sabotaged I don't think the fall is as unlikely as when I saw the film before.
__________________
"I tell you what you all need, you need to take a thirteenth step, down off your high horse." - Hank Hill, King of the Hill
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 14 2013, 04:05 AM   #4219
Ovation
Vice Admiral
 
Location: La Belle Province or The Green Mountain State (depends on the day of the week)
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

An excellent example of applying a bit of thought to the available evidence and arriving at a reasonably plausible conclusion without having it all explicitly laid out to you.

You deserve a commendation for original thinking.
Ovation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 14 2013, 09:25 AM   #4220
CommishSleer
Fleet Captain
 
CommishSleer's Avatar
 
Location: Way back of nowhere
View CommishSleer's Twitter Profile
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

AnnLouise wrote: View Post
I think the movie has a lot of flaws and if they stop you from liking it then that's fine. However if other people can overlook the flaws and inconsistencies and blatant homeage then why aren't their opinions as valid as yours.
For me, a movie becomes "bad" when something in it takes me out of the movie experience. I starting thinking about the flaw, and not the movie. For me, the flaws in ST didn't take me out of the film, so I'm more forgiving of them.
Its OK not to like it but its OK for others to like it.

'Naked Now' took me out of TNG for years. I still hate it. Yet lots of people like TNG and 'Naked Now'. That's OK - it was my loss. As the years have progressed I'm getting over it and even like some Season 1 of TNG

BillJ wrote: View Post
I just don't know how you can say you're a Trek fan and not enjoy Into Darkness on at least some level.
Some people are only 24th century fans.

KittyDuran wrote: View Post
CommishSleer wrote: View Post
mos6507 wrote: View Post

For me, Spock yelling "Khaaan!!!!" or running down the street like a dork destroys my suspension of disbelief in a way that thinking "Gee, wasn't Checkov not on the Enterprise during Space Seed?" doesn't.
I agree with others that Nimoy used to 'run like a girl' in TOS on the few occasions he did run.
It was adorable
Myself and CorporalCaptain in another thread thought he looked like an albatross ready to take flight! (still adorable...)
I thought it was just me
CommishSleer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 14 2013, 10:11 AM   #4221
Shazam!
Rear Admiral
 
Shazam!'s Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

BillJ wrote: View Post
As far as plot-holes go...

When the Enterprise starts what I've seen called her improbable fall to Earth, couldn't she have actually been in the planet's orbital path? At roughly 67,000 miles per hour and factoring in the time it took for New Vulcan to be called, the Vengeance repaired, torpedoes to be sabotaged I don't think the fall is as unlikely as when I saw the film before.
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/62867

And then! To top it off, they start crashing into, what? Not the Moon, the Earth! I *think* some character mumbles something about them being caught in the Earth’s gravity, and they are all the sudden being pulled in. Here’s where the movie gets a little cloudy, or maybe it is just my understanding of what was supposed to be going on. Within a few minutes they are pulled from right next to the Moon all the way into the Earth’s atmosphere. This is just insane.

Rather than go through some equations about how long this would take, instead we can just look at the case of Apollo 13. We launched a rocket from Earth, and due to a catastrophic failure of one of the oxygen tanks, they had to abort their lunar landing mission and move to a “free return” trajectory around the moon, and back to Earth. “Free return” just means that you don’t have to fire the rockets to return to Earth, you just use lunar gravity to swing you back around to Earth, with some minor course corrections. This is cool, because it tells us how long it takes a spaceship to “fall” back to Earth from the moon, if it can’t use its engines! In the case of Apollo 13, it took about 64 hours. Actually, that’s faster than it otherwise would have, because they did burn the descent engine two hours after swinging around the moon to speed their return to Earth by 10 hours. Anyway, the bottom line is that it takes *days*, not minutes, for a spacecraft to fall to Earth from lunar orbit.

When the Enterprise is falling into the Earth, it looks like it is falling straight into it, as if the two are balls on a string being drawn to each other. That’s not the way two bodies gravitationally attracted to each other work -- they approach each other on curved paths. Have you ever wondered why everything in space orbits something? It is because of conservation of angular momentum.

The most famous terrestrial example is an ice skater spinning. When she draws in her outstretched arms, she starts spinning faster and faster. The same thing would happen to the Enterprise as it fell to Earth. It wouldn’t fall straight in, it would kind of orbit. If it didn’t have the energy to make a complete orbit, it would still sort of half-loop around the Earth, and come in at an angle.

What energy would it have? Ignoring vectors, the formula for angular momentum (L) is L=rmv, where r is the distance from the axis of rotation to the thing rotating around it, m is the mass, and v is the velocity perpendicular to the line defined by r. We can make a ratio of the angular momentum at the Moon’s orbit and the angular momentum as the Enterprise enters the Earth’s atmosphere. Then, since angular momentum is conserved, and mass is conserved, these two quantities cancel. We’re left with vE=vM*(rM/rE). The ratio of the distance to the Moon to the Earth’s radius is about 60. That means whatever transverse velocity the Enterprise had at the orbit of the Moon would be amplified by a factor of 60 by the time it reached Earth, just due to conservation of angular momentum.

Would they have even crashed into the Earth? The escape velocity of the Earth (the velocity needed to achieve orbit) is about 7 km/s if you are already in space (it is higher if you have to leave the surface). And 7 km/s / 60 = about 100 m/s. So if the Enterprise was traveling at 100 meters per second or more relative to the Earth when it was at the Moon’s orbit, it never would have fallen all the way to the Earth, it would have attained orbital velocity by the time it reached the atmosphere. One hundred meters per second is not very fast -- that’s only ten times faster than a human can run! That’s nothing for a ship that just dropped out of warp and is being hit by projectiles. Just shoot a photon torpedo in the opposite direction and let the back reaction give you the tiny push to remain in orbit.

Fine, so you have to have them actually crash into Earth, because the script calls for it. My point is, show them streaking into the atmosphere at an angle, not falling directly down on the Earth. It is a small thing, but to anyone who knows science, it is glaring, and just shows that most people who worked on this movie know very little about physics and didn’t talk to anyone who did.
Shazam! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 14 2013, 03:24 PM   #4222
Kruezerman
Fleet Captain
 
Kruezerman's Avatar
 
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Isn't Ain't It Cool vehemently against the JJ films? To the point of irrational hatred?
__________________
*Tim Duncan fills glass with milk*
"Hm, you know what..."
*adds squirt of chocolate syrup*
"Tonight's a special night."
Kruezerman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 14 2013, 03:31 PM   #4223
Shazam!
Rear Admiral
 
Shazam!'s Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

No, Harry loved it and so did Capone.
Shazam! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 14 2013, 05:06 PM   #4224
CorporalCaptain
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Breaking News:
Star Trek movies don't obey real-world physics!
In other news:
Dog bites man!
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 14 2013, 05:22 PM   #4225
Opus
Commodore
 
Opus's Avatar
 
Location: Bloom County
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Well, a personal thumbs-up for STiD, my wife loved it.

My wife is not a sci-fi fan. She loved TNG and DS9, but really only watched it because I was a fan. She never liked any of the Trek movies - thought they were cheesy. She barely liked ST09.

I finally got her to go last night - it might be the last day to see it in the first-run theatres around here. Talk about last minute.

In her words - "Wow!"

She loved the characters, the story arc, the action, the pace of the movie, the mystery, the FX. She thought Cumberbatch made a wonderfully menacing bad guy. In her words, "It's a movie I'd go see again, in the theatre."

Non-Fans see a great movie here.

::Happy Dance::

ETA:

Shazam! wrote: View Post
Fine, so you have to have them actually crash into Earth, because the script calls for it. My point is, show them streaking into the atmosphere at an angle, not falling directly down on the Earth. It is a small thing, but to anyone who knows science, it is glaring, and just shows that most people who worked on this movie know very little about physics and didn’t talk to anyone who did.
You mean the Star Trek with the Warp Drive, Matter/Energy Transporters, Galactic Energy Barriers, Slingshot-Around-the-Sun Time Travel, etc., etc. etc... ?

50 years of implausible science, The Enterprise falls to earth, and THAT'S where you're drawing your 'Physics Line in the Sand'?
__________________
Now that I've seen it, and have also had time to mellow, to really think about it, I now find it absolutely, unbearably repulsive in every way except for some of the acting. - about The Wrath of Khan. Interstat, Issue 62: 1982
Opus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 14 2013, 05:30 PM   #4226
Amasov
Rear Admiral
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]



If you guys are interested, I filmed this at a recent convention here in Boston. Marina Sirtis and Levar Burton are talking about Into Darkness quite candidly.
Amasov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 14 2013, 06:21 PM   #4227
Shazam!
Rear Admiral
 
Shazam!'s Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Opus wrote: View Post
50 years of implausible science, The Enterprise falls to earth, and THAT'S where you're drawing your 'Physics Line in the Sand'?
What, at the rules of gravity? Sure, why not.
Shazam! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 14 2013, 06:37 PM   #4228
CorporalCaptain
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Shazam! wrote: View Post
Opus wrote: View Post
50 years of implausible science, The Enterprise falls to earth, and THAT'S where you're drawing your 'Physics Line in the Sand'?
What, at the rules of gravity? Sure, why not.
Star Trek has never obeyed the rules of gravity, since the ridiculously rapidly decaying orbits of TOS. Your insistence that it start obeying real orbital mechanics now, something it never, ever did before, is completely arbitrary.

So, to be clear, JJTrek is bad, because it isn't like old Trek. And, it's bad, because it is like old Trek. It can never win.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 14 2013, 06:46 PM   #4229
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

It took me a few science classes to unlearn what TOS alleged about "decaying orbits" and other nonsense.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 14 2013, 06:53 PM   #4230
Shazam!
Rear Admiral
 
Shazam!'s Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
Star Trek has never obeyed the rules of gravity, since the ridiculously rapidly decaying orbits of TOS. Your insistence that it start obeying real orbital mechanics now, something it never, ever did before, is completely arbitrary.
As a Doctor Who fan I take psuedo-science in my stride. I linked to an article exposing the [lack of] science in Star Trek.

I actually think it would have provided a cooler visual if the laws of gravity had been even slightly adhered to, with the Enterprise streaking across the sky in a decaying orbit as opposed to tumbling like a big sack of spuds.
Shazam! is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
benedict cumberbatch, grading & discussion, jj abrams

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:33 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.